Michael Amity explores how we got to a place in our free society where we are far from being free.
–
Eileen DiNino, of Reading, Pennsylvania, went to jail on Friday to erase $2,000 of old fines and newer court fees. Tragically, the 55 year old mother of seven died while serving her 2 day sentence. The judge who put her there–he says he did it reluctantly–after four years of non-payment, has pointed out she didn’t need to be there; like thousands of others in our system, she just didn’t have the money.
A free state for every one of its citizens is theoretically possible, and some of America’s ideas have come close at points in history… for certain segments of the population that is. “All men are created equal” is genius, revolutionary, and changed the world, but that said, it was a lot easier to get that through when unspoken meaning was all white men.
And therefore, looking bluntly at our nature, I recognize that a form of totalitarianism is categorically the norm in governance matters–at least, eventually–the status quo, if you will. Peering at our collective actions, historically, and at present, I ask, do we really think we’re so different?
The gist of any system is the state exists with the purpose to satisfy its population, fitting with the practicality of its given day. It creates salaried positions and contracts to further opportunities deemed necessary. In so doing, it is good, supposedly, so far as it may justify its existence by serving us. That is the social contract.
We know from balancing our checkbooks each month that a government can operate within its allotted and agreed upon budget, if it wants, but it chooses not to and we allow it. So instead of doing what it can, invariably, it tries to excuse and justify an increase in largesse by convincing us that certain needs exceed our fiscal capabilities. We borrow from our children to meet targets and goals, serving conflicts and doling punishments.
Government is derived from two words in Latin, “ruling” and “mind”. So I’m not surprised that it is allowed what We, the People, are not. It doesn’t matter if they use force or trickery. It’s always basically a series of irresponsible actions–wars or accounting–to sustain itself rather than sticking within its allotted constraints
Here’s an interesting statement from Alexander Fraser Tyler, a lesser known theorist on government:
“It is not, perhaps, unreasonable to conclude, that a pure and perfect democracy is a thing not attainable by man, constituted as he is of contending elements of vice and virtue, and ever mainly influenced by the predominant principle of self-interest. It may, indeed, be confidently asserted, that there never was that government called a republic, which was not ultimately ruled by a single will, and, therefore, (however bold may seem the paradox,) virtually and substantially a monarchy.”
That statement is great, but even better is a succinct social-evolutionary deduction that is often misattributed to him (in fact, I found the above quote by looking up this one):
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy.”
While a compromise with our rulers could seem fair, or maybe not, it is clear that we did not sign up to be treated as serfs, so we should fight against it. The elite know this, and work to keep their system running by diverting attention away from them and their handlers. So whenever a problem seems to be too one sided in favor of bureaucrats rather than citizens, depending on the day, for stability’s sake, shift of focus is placed on corporations. And, wouldn’t you know, they just so happen to be run by most the same people, though not always with our knowledge. After all, companies originate by nature as privatized, and we think of that as desired.
The companies that replace government do so to accomplish most of the dirty work that we wouldn’t want to see public workers handle. It varies by location, for instance, often sanitation is a service best carried out through competitive biddings, publicly considered, with options scanning among an honorable business; other times, we end up with the mafia instead.
Companies are given free reign–until caught–to do as they please, generating profits and handling public perceptions. At times they trample on the noble cause they were trusted with, and no one ever stops them, so long as public scrutiny is not apparent. So the role of journalism is the Fourth Estate, the unspoken branch of government that watches over everything. That’s why I’m writing this instead of making big bucks behind the scenes.
Our sometimes unfitting compromises both ensure progress and wiggle room necessary to adjust currents with a diverse population. We are all seeking to meet our own needs and to try to live within the establishment of a just society.
That, my friends, is human nature: collectivism versus the individualist purpose. Ralph Waldo Emerson, the greatest mind we’ve produced, many would say, put it in his essay Self-Reliance, as follows, “Society everywhere is in conspiracy against every one of its members.”
So, when I hear the term conspiracy theory, or the like, I do not give any credence if it’s coming from any person of power. It’s my job to question that person vigorously, not dictate their message. I have an obligation to assume they are in conspiracy against me, and you, whoever they are–scary.
Not to worry. I’ve got one more quote to ease our minds. When I feel down, I do as George Carlin proffered and choose to “not trust a word the government tells me.” Simple. And I recommend you do the same. Not as a personal vendetta against any one, but as a matter of enlightened opinion that just seems natural.
_
In case you think this is just talk, and is not imperative, I bring you a brief showcase of how tyranny might be knocking on your door sometime soon, any day now. Please watch these two short videos on a new trend, that takes us back in time in a way. It reminds me of the constant need for journalists, as this is certainly worthy of our attention, and our action.
It’s the story of our government locking people up just for being poor. And I have an insight why they do this. Not really an insight. More like common sense. It’s for money, of course, primarily, but also that age-old pursuit of government, that of subjugating the population, so they may be turned over to private companies.
And here’s something you won’t hear anywhere else: The rules we have in place, the ones that we think make us free, actually do not. In truth, according to the letter of the law, the courts are able to enslave us legally as per our Constitution, Amendment 13, Section 1, which reads: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” (My emphasis added)
Currently the United States, which comprises 5% of the human race, imprisons over 2 million people, which equates to 25% of the world’s prison population. Is it a coincidence we have such vast wealth widespread across our humongous population? I think not. I’m not indicting anyone. Just asking you to consider, in case you were ever wondering, how you are able to live so well. I’ll tell you, it’s not all foreign labor, a lot of it is here in our homeland, and it’s existence is a crying shame.
–
Photo: flickr/Sharan Mohandoss
Great article! Sad state of affairs here and throughout the world. But I’m an optimist, knowing that real change takes generations. But by being aware of the problems – as stated here and underscored by the video – we can be part of the solution. And that’s were it’s really at…
Gary Wimmer
http://garywimmer.com/psychic
“Eileen DeNino, 55, was put in the cell where she died because she could not pay thousands of dollars in fines relating to her children’s truancy from schools”
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/06/12/3448105/mother-dies-jail-cell-fines/
The fines were incurred because she didn’t ensure that her children went to school. If the fines never have to be paid, where is the deterrent? Are fines never an appropriate punishment for “criminal” behavior? I suppose we could limit non-incarceration penalties to probation or community service.
No misdemeanor warrants jail, I always thought. But when procedures to ensure justice are overlooked by all sides, it is ripe for exploitation, such as the jailing of people for minor infractions, simply because they are of lesser means, and that is both widespread and illegal.
Case mentioned is probably a poor one for the situation. Agreed sending someone to jail for non violent crime is ridiculous (believe that is 80-90% of inmates in the US). But no one outrages over the fathers who are jailed for falling behind on child support. Seriously how does that solve anything. Man can’t make money and therefore pay bills when he is locked up know can he. Garry below says he is an optimist but in the UK (may also have been 2012) last year the police ran a fathers day campaign of seeking out and arresting ‘deadbeat dads’… Read more »
Exactly. Whatever the violation, peace is never attained when the violent are ignored so that jails can be filled with the ones who are easy to catch. Why have businesses ruining the poor’s lives with impunity? Budgetary concerns? Yuck. Private control of everyone seems more the aim. I hope we can stop the trend of public servant subcontracting to folks who break rules and destroy lives. They say the righteous is a narrow path. Punishing nonviolent offenders only makes us depend more on the wrong path, ever-widening as it diverts their purpose to indemnity.